This item is from the 111th Congress (2009-2010) and is no longer current. Comments, voting, and wiki editing have been disabled, and the cost/savings estimate has been frozen.

S. 181 would amend title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, and to modify the operation of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, to clarify that a discriminatory compensation decision or other practice that is unlawful under such Acts occurs each time compensation is paid pursuant to the discriminatory compensation decision or other practice.

Detailed Summary

<b>(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)</b>

Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009 - Amends the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to declare that an unlawful employment practice occurs when: (1) a discriminatory compensation decision or other practice is adopted; (2) an individual becomes subject to the decision or practice; or (3) an individual is affected by application of the decision or practice, including each time wages, benefits, or other compensation is paid. Allows liability to accrue, and allows an aggrieved person to obtain relief, including recovery of back pay, for up to two years preceding the filing of the charge, where the unlawful employment practices that have occurred during the charge filing period are similar or related to practices that occurred outside the time for filing a charge. Applies the preceding provisions to claims of compensation discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.<br>

Amends the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 to declare that an unlawful practice occurs when a discriminatory compensation decision or other practice is adopted, when a person becomes subject to the decision or other practice, or when a person is affected by the decision or practice, including each time wages, benefits, or other compensation is paid.

Status of the Legislation

Latest Major Action: 1/28/2009: Presented to President.

Points in Favor

(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should pass!)

Points Against

(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should not pass!)

From the Blog

If you’re like most people, you didn’t even hear about “binders full of women.” Most people don’t pay attention to the presidential debates, you see. They might not be wrong to ignore these narrow windows into the qualific...

Visitor Comments

Doubtful Avenger

Even assuming a 6-month statute of limitations was too small (and I doubt that, as one can see wage discrimination in his paycheck upon receipt), I can't even imagine removing it altogether. Employers can't even assess risk or reserve funds for this potential liability, as it extends ad nauseum into the future. This will cause staffing levels to drop, when we are already at a critical stage with unemployment rising. Is the Congress as totally ignorant as it appears?

jjohnson

It is going to be impossible to implement. Just because a person holds a like job position does not mean that they are equally qualified. One person may have had more years of experience or has a better performance level than the other. All pay should reflect productivity and performance benefits to the company. Obviously, it is very hard for me to support this line of thinking as I have worked in many male dominated industries and have seen unequal pay. However, I still believe you should be compensated for good work, the experience you bring to the position, and overall performance. I feel that this Bill will really be serving the aims, and filling the pockets of suit happy trial lawyers. I think that it will more than likely be strongly supported by the American Bar Assoc.'s lobby with the intent of opening up more avenues to file suit. It is going to cost the American tax payer tremendously and not serve its original good intentions.

The Atheist Party

As a proud disabled-atheist, this bill is a much needed. Any Christians who commit hate crime against the disabled, the atheist, the Church of Scientology, The little people, the big people who are to be over 6 feet tall, and other peoples religion, race, ethnic, and culture should not deserve to get a job or open up a business because they can't tolerate for what other people do, say or believe. For the love of Scientology, Jesus is dead people. Stop this biblical preaching nonsense and renounce that dead man's name.